From: Arthur Abraham <a2@well.sf.ca.us>
Your point is that government employees in non-critical positions might end up using Clipper, and this would either reduce corruption or, alternatively, drive the government to repudiate the entire scheme. The latter will not happen (at least not for this reason). Labeling of cliches notwithstanding, there is no reason why government employees could not use a different standard if they found it necessary. This would be no more politically disagreeable than many steps taken in the past. The former I don't understand. The direct effect of Clipper would be to make eavesdropping by other than LE more difficult. There could be an impact on corruption only if it were known or believed that the level of surveillance had concomitantly increased -- if all calls were tapped and archived, perhaps. This would be bad. It would undoubtedly increase the likelihood of such a policy's being implemented w.r.t. the general population.
-a2.]
Eli ebrandt@jarthur.claremont.edu